Ghislaine Maxwell received preferential treatment while incarcerated at a federal prison in Texas, according to a former nurse at the facility. Noella Turnage, who has worked for the Bureau of Prisons since 2019, identified herself Monday as the whistleblower who previously provided some of Maxwell’s correspondence to members of the House Judiciary Committee, Newsweek reported.
“I actually emailed them from work, from my Bureau of Prisons email address, and said, ‘Hey, this is who I am, this is where I work, and I have some things I think you might be interested in, and documents you may be interested in,’” Turnage told KBTX. “I didn’t even specify what it was.”
A staff member for Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, responded to Turnage within 30 minutes, she said. The 46-year-old added that she has since participated in multiple follow-up calls regarding her disclosures.
“I have not shared them with anyone other than the committee,” Turnage said of Maxwell’s emails, some of which she showed to a reporter this week, KBTX reported.
Over the summer, Maxwell confirmed to the Department of Justice during a series of sit-down meetings that she did not witness Donald Trump exhibit inappropriate behavior on the occasions that she met him.
Maxwell had met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche for a total of nine hours late last month. According to her attorney, she had been forthright during questioning and did not “plead the fifth.”
According to ABC News’ sources, Maxwell reportedly said that Trump had “never done anything in her presence that would have caused concern.”
As for Turnage, she said she provided Maxwell’s correspondence after facing retaliation from Bureau of Prisons officials for reporting what she described as poor working conditions and the alleged mistreatment of inmates at Federal Prison Camp Bryan.
She said her complaints resulted in her reassignment to the facility’s “phone room,” where her responsibilities included monitoring inmate telephone calls and emails, Newsweek noted.
“They call it prison jail,” Turnage told KBTX. “I would be looking for any evidence that they’re doing something they shouldn’t be. Like, are they trying to smuggle in drugs? Are they doing this? Are they whatever? But these women aren’t risking that, not for the most part. And same as emails, you’re monitoring for anything they shouldn’t be doing. Usually on the phone, the biggest thing you run into is they’ll call a family member who then conference calls somebody else that they’re not supposed to be talking to.”
Turnage said that Tanisha Hall, the warden of the federal prison, personally handled all incoming mail addressed to Maxwell.
Maxwell — who is serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s international sex-trafficking operation — also received “private, catered-style visitation arrangements” at the minimum-security facility, according to KBTX.
“There was the whole thing about closing down the compound for her to have a visit,” Turnage told the outlet.
Maxwell’s relatives were permitted to attend private meetings, often disguised as legal consultations, claims Turnage.
“I guess maybe they can bring everybody and say it’s a legal visit?” she continued. “I don’t know, but they’re going to have an area cornered off for you, so it won’t be a problem coming in. They’re going to provide drinks, coffee, snacks, and all this stuff.”
Some of Ghislaine Maxwell’s outgoing correspondence appeared “coded,” with irregular spacing and formatting that differed from messages sent by other inmates, according to Turnage.
The veteran Bureau of Prisons (BOP) employee printed some of Maxwell’s messages and examined them at home. After noticing a Wall Street Journal report in early October about the favorable treatment that Epstein’s former associate allegedly received at the federal prison, Turnage shared the emails with Raskin’s office.
Dozens of Democratic candidates running for U.S. House seats nationwide told Axios they either would not support House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) for party leader or were not prepared to commit to voting for him.
The responses suggest growing unease within some parts of the Democratic Party about its current leadership as the 2026 election cycle approaches, the outlet reported this week.
Since assuming the role of Democratic leader in 2022, Hakeem Jeffries has maintained unanimous support within his caucus. That unity, however, may be tested in the next Congress amid rising frustration from grassroots activists, particularly on the party’s left flank.
While Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has drawn much of the criticism from progressive circles this year, Jeffries is increasingly becoming a focal point of dissatisfaction as well, Axios noted.
Axios contacted nearly every Democrat running for a U.S. House seat considered potentially winnable for the party in 2026, receiving responses from 113 candidates through phone interviews or written statements.
Of those surveyed, 20 said they would not vote for Hakeem Jeffries as speaker or minority leader, while another five indicated they were likely to oppose him. Fifty-seven candidates declined to commit to supporting Jeffries, describing it as too early to decide or citing concerns over ideology, strategy, messaging, or leadership style.
Only 24 respondents said they would definitely back Jeffries, and seven more said they were likely to do so, the outlet said.
However, his office pushed back on the narrative that he’s lost support.
“Leader Jeffries is focused on battling Donald Trump, ending the Republican shutdown of the federal government and addressing the crushing GOP health care crisis,” Jeffries spokesperson Justin Chermol told Axios.
Many of the Democrats expressing skepticism toward Hakeem Jeffries are political outsiders or long-shot candidates, while several front-runners in key battleground races declined to respond to Axios’ inquiries. Still, a number of Jeffries’ critics and noncommittal candidates have credible paths to winning seats in Congress.
Among them are Daniel Biss and Kat Abughazaleh, two leading contenders in the Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), both of whom stopped short of pledging to support Jeffries.
Other prominent challengers — including Luke Bronin, Donavan McKinney, Mai Vang, Saikat Chakrabarti, and Patrick Roath — have also withheld their support. Each is running well-funded campaigns aimed at unseating long-serving Democratic incumbents.
Heath Howard, a New Hampshire state representative running for an open U.S. House seat, told Axios regarding the Democratic leader: “I think we need to have a new type of leadership that’s … going to fight back significantly harder against the Trump administration.”
Abughazaleh, meanwhile, told Axios she will support a leader who is “taking actual action against this administration” and that the left should use “our leverage to demand progressive change.”
“We’ve got to see improvement, without question,” Amanda Edwards, who was a member of the Houston city council and is now running in a Texas special election, told the outlet.
Harry Jarin, a firefighter mounting a primary challenge to former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), told Axios: “The anger of the base right now is not being matched by Democratic leadership … and that is going to have to change one way or another.”
A recurring theme among candidates who declined to back Jeffries was his refusal to endorse socialist New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — a decision that has also become a source of frustration among left-wing members of Congress.
“His refusal to endorse Zohran makes me nervous that, if I were to become the nominee in my race, he and the party would not support me,” noted Jacob Lawrence, who is set to challenged Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.).
Chakrabarti, when asked whether he would support for Jeffries, quipped: “What is it that Hakeem said about endorsing Zohran? ‘I’ll have conversations with him and see where it goes.\’”